The Ming Dynasty had the Forbidden City, and Mao Zedong had Tiananmen Square. Now China's present-day emperors too are constructing a new Beijing in their own image.

Throughout the city, stunning buildings are breaking ground in time for the 2008 Olympics, the symbolic moment, the country believes, when it will resume its place among the world's great powers.

The "Duck Egg" - the new national theater - is almost complete. The "Bird's Nest," as the Olympic stadium has been called for its steel lattice-work, and the "Blue Cube," the swimming pool complex, are rising.

Elsewhere ever grander state buildings are materializing as they are stripped of their scaffolding. But just at the moment of glory, the new designs by celebrated architects from Europe and Australia have set off a major controversy. Public figures are criticizing the billions of yuan being spent, while leading members of the architectural establishment have added their own complaint: there is nothing at all Chinese about them.

Long before Beijing was awarded the Games, it was clear that for the party leadership they were a chance to clear the stain of the Tiananmen Square massacre, and to reassure itself that it was now a "grown-up" country.

No expense was to be spared: perhaps 40 billion (HK$568 billion) is to be spent creating a new city.

Leaving aside the venues themselves, there will be four new subway lines, an airport - designed by Norman Foster to be the largest in the world - and a new financial district.

That is on top of the encouragement given to private developers to raze old neighborhoods and replace them with apartment blocks. More than 300,000 people will be relocated.

The first indication that there was a problem with this vision, essentially the work of former president Jiang Zemin, came when work ceased on the new tower for China television.

Budgeted at 400 million, and designed by Dutch avant-garde architect Rem Koolhaas, it resembles two upside-down Ls leaning against each other like a pair of drunks.

It emerged that incoming Premier Wen Jiabao, a man whose reputation was built on being down to earth and concerned for the poor, had called for a review. Eventually it was deemed too late to stop. But in the meantime the national theater building was also under fire. Its controversial dome was the work of Paul Andreu, the Frenchman whose terminal building at Charles de Gaulle airport suffered a fatal collapse in May last year.

Proposals for the Olympic village had so far been immune from criticism.

Indeed, China took pride from jokes in spring 2004 that its Olympics would be ready before the Athens ones.

But then even the International Olympic Committee began to get cold feet, and suggested that the city moderate its pace.

Work on the Swiss-designed "Bird's Nest" stopped while its exorbitant use of steel - 160,000 tons, or 22 Eiffel Towers - was cut, by deciding not to go ahead with the sliding roof. The rebuilding is now on track again.

But while many residents are resigned to the destruction of what remains of the Ming city, in return for modern conveniences, some establishment voices have begun to raise their voices. In a speech this month, Wu Liangyong, a professor at Qinghua University, said the city was an "experimenting ground for foreign architects."

"These buildings will be a scar left on the face of time, which will record our pains forever," he said.

"Once the land is used and this unreasonable urbanization spread, it is irreversible."

In contrast to the early days of the Olympics, state media have allowed a debate, with even the People's Daily publishing attacks on the loss of the city's character. Even some of the defenders

have pointed out that China, despite its Olympic-sized ambitions, was still too underdeveloped to have the expertise to design world-class buildings.

Some issues, however, are still too sensitive.

Few newspapers or architects mention the grand boulevard intended to connect the Olympic village to the city's historic center.

It is being designed by Albert Speer, a well-respected architect but also the son and namesake of the man who built Nazi Berlin, including a similar boulevard for the 1936 Olympics. Comparison of Beijing 2008 and "Hitler's Games" are a step too far in modern China.

__________________Hong Kong Photo Gallery - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

World Photo Gallery - | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!

im sorry if i had offended anyone in the chinese forum..
the reason is i always had a different perspective of china, i saw it as an evil communist country...but i was wrong...i see things are changing...
i want to visit!!

"Evil communist country"? If you truly believed that then I believe it's safe to assume you are 1.) naive and 2.) stereotypical.

The reason that you're naive is because you assumed that a country of 5,000 years of history and a current population of 1.3 billion to be nothing but "evil". If you've taken even a single sociology class you'd realize that there is no such thing as an "evil country", only governments who are willing to sacrifice its people's freedom and happiness in order to achieve its interests. Of course, all governments do that to some extend (including the U.S.) though some do it more than others and some do it more at different times. A good example would be the post-911 U.S. is much less "free".

As for being stereotypical, it should be pretty obvious as you, again, assumed that a country of 1.3 billion people are all "evil" and "communists".

In any case, no one is perfect and we all have our flaws. I am in no way attempting to offend you, not that any mature, rational adult could be easily insulted from being criticized by an anonymous individual over the Internet. I am merely pointing out what you may need to learn in order to survive in the real world as you seem to come off as a pretty young individual, perhaps a early teenager.

Helpful links:To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Evil communist country"? If you truly believed that then I believe it's safe to assume you are 1.) naive and 2.) stereotypical.

The reason that you're naive is because you assumed that a country of 5,000 years of history and a current population of 1.3 billion to be nothing but "evil". If you've taken even a single sociology class you'd realize that there is no such thing as an "evil country", only governments who are willing to sacrifice its people's freedom and happiness in order to achieve its interests. Of course, all governments do that to some extend (including the U.S.) though some do it more than others and some do it more at different times. A good example would be the post-911 U.S. is much less "free".

As for being stereotypical, it should be pretty obvious as you, again, assumed that a country of 1.3 billion people are all "evil" and "communists".

In any case, no one is perfect and we all have our flaws. I am in no way attempting to offend you, not that any mature, rational adult could be easily insulted from being criticized by an anonymous individual over the Internet. I am merely pointing out what you may need to learn in order to survive in the real world as you seem to come off as a pretty young individual, perhaps a early teenager.

For ****'s sake Pangu he was saying nice things about Beijing! Give the poor guy a break!!

^ But why are you dishing out criticism in the first place? It's completely unneccessary and frankly aggressive. The tone of his post is mainly "wow - I'm impressed" but you go and pick up on one throwaway phrase and have a rant about it making all kinds of unjustified assumptions about what kind of a person he is. I mean did you come up with all of that stuff just based on this one post here or are you responding to things he has posted elsewhere as well? I hope for your sake it's the latter because as it stands your post says more negative things about you than him. And there's nothing immature about using the word "****" - what's immature is having inhibitions about the word. I mean who are we trying to impress here with our clean language? Mummy? Grandma??

And you say he doesn't need me to hold his hand - maybe so - but then I don't think he needs you to give him such a patronising and insulting lecture either.

I love Bejing low rise modern buildings, they use to be so wide, and very Chinese looking. I think that Beijing is preserving the national identity in its modern architecture better than any other Chinese city while there are also being built many other unique and brave design buildings. A lot of personality!

The modern face of this city is amazing but quite underrated though...

__________________What is dead may never die, but rises again, harder and stronger.

More than To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. on going in China.

im sorry if i had offended anyone in the chinese forum..
the reason is i always had a different perspective of china, i saw it as an evil communist country...but i was wrong...i see things are changing...
i want to visit!!

I have felt your good intentions.
Let us shake hands.

__________________Chinese cuisine

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Chinese Girls Part I

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Chinese Girls Part II

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Chinese military

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Evil communist country"? If you truly believed that then I believe it's safe to assume you are 1.) naive and 2.) stereotypical.

The reason that you're naive is because you assumed that a country of 5,000 years of history and a current population of 1.3 billion to be nothing but "evil". If you've taken even a single sociology class you'd realize that there is no such thing as an "evil country", only governments who are willing to sacrifice its people's freedom and happiness in order to achieve its interests. Of course, all governments do that to some extend (including the U.S.) though some do it more than others and some do it more at different times. A good example would be the post-911 U.S. is much less "free".

As for being stereotypical, it should be pretty obvious as you, again, assumed that a country of 1.3 billion people are all "evil" and "communists".

In any case, no one is perfect and we all have our flaws. I am in no way attempting to offend you, not that any mature, rational adult could be easily insulted from being criticized by an anonymous individual over the Internet. I am merely pointing out what you may need to learn in order to survive in the real world as you seem to come off as a pretty young individual, perhaps a early teenager.

There is no such thing as "absolute evil", but evil does exist, an attribution that may vary according to different social norms. For example, to people who value self-determination, freedom, democracy and basic human rights like myself, China, North Korea and the Roh administration are evil. However, to people who place more emphasis on social stability and unity, China can be a model example.

Also, many people may use the term "country" to refer to the government that governs it, not its people.

Also, many people may use the term "country" to refer to the government that governs it, not its people.

WordNet definition for the word "country":

1. (276) country, state, land -- (the territory occupied by a nation; "he returned to the land of his birth"; "he visited several European countries")
2. (257) state, nation, country, land, commonwealth, res publica, body politic -- (a politically organized body of people under a single government; "the state has elected a new president"; "African nations"; "students who had come to the nation's capitol"; "the country's largest manufacturer"; "an industrialized land")
3. (71) nation, land, country, a people -- (the people who live in a nation or country; "a statement that sums up the nation's mood"; "the news was announced to the nation"; "the whole country worshipped him")
4. (39) country, rural area -- (an area outside of cities and towns; "his poetry celebrated the slower pace of life in the country")
5. (29) area, country -- (a particular geographical region of indefinite boundary (usually serving some special purpose or distinguished by its people or culture or geography); "it was a mountainous area"; "Bible country")

People need to be careful with the words they use, according to WordNet,
not sense of "country" is synonymous with "government", therefore, when you
insult a country, you are effectively insulting the people of that country.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

1. (276) country, state, land -- (the territory occupied by a nation; "he returned to the land of his birth"; "he visited several European countries")
2. (257) state, nation, country, land, commonwealth, res publica, body politic -- (a politically organized body of people under a single government; "the state has elected a new president"; "African nations"; "students who had come to the nation's capitol"; "the country's largest manufacturer"; "an industrialized land")
3. (71) nation, land, country, a people -- (the people who live in a nation or country; "a statement that sums up the nation's mood"; "the news was announced to the nation"; "the whole country worshipped him")
4. (39) country, rural area -- (an area outside of cities and towns; "his poetry celebrated the slower pace of life in the country")
5. (29) area, country -- (a particular geographical region of indefinite boundary (usually serving some special purpose or distinguished by its people or culture or geography); "it was a mountainous area"; "Bible country")

People need to be careful with the words they use, according to WordNet,
not sense of "country" is synonymous with "government", therefore, when you
insult a country, you are effectively insulting the people of that country.

Yes, countries can refer to the people who are governed by the respective political unit, but knowledgeable individuals should be able to dicern between the various meanings by context. For example, JC here said China is an evil, communist country. Unless ones assumes that JC is an ultra-racist who believes China is infested with crime-loving "evil" communists, I believe it is common sense that the attributions of "evil" and "communist" are directed towards the political organization called CCP, not the people, especially for a country where the form of political organization is not determined by the those ruled. This kind of use for the term can lead to misunderstandings, but this is not some court of law where they bitch eachother on the specific meanings of words. I think we should be open to the possibility that people can use the same term for different meanings.

For example, JC here said China is an evil, communist country. Unless ones assumes that JC is an ultra-racist who believes China is infested with crime-loving "evil" communists, I believe it is common sense that the attributions of "evil" and "communist" are directed towards the political organization called CCP, not the people

I don't know about other people, but as soon as I saw JC's comments, I thought
that she was an ultra-racist who hated China to her guts and she really believed
all the bad things she said about China. Remember that practically everyone you
meet on an internet forum is a stranger, so you have to make your judgement
based on what they say, and if some one comes out with comments that you
would expect from an ultra-racist who hates China, then you'd regard him/her as
an ultra-racist who hates China.

If you don't say what you mean, then you are not telling the truth; if you don't
know how to express yourself, you'd have to let people know about it too.

If you assume, you make an ass out of you and me.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I don't know about other people, but as soon as I saw JC's comments, I thought
that she was an ultra-racist who hated China to her guts and she really believed
all the bad things she said about China. Remember that practically everyone you
meet on an internet forum is a stranger, so you have to make your judgement
based on what they say, and if some one comes out with comments that you
would expect from an ultra-racist who hates China, then you'd regard him/her as
an ultra-racist who hates China.

If you don't say what you mean, then you are not telling the truth; if you don't
know how to express yourself, you'd have to let people know about it too.

If you assume, you make an ass out of you and me.

I criticized Pangu's post on two points:

1. Evil does exist, and yes, I took classes in Introduction to Sociology, Classical Sociology, Sociological Perspectives on Religion, and my major is Criminal Justice, dealing with all things evil. A sociological perspective that rejects anything "evil" is called the Radical/Conflict Theory(crime is a conflict between the haves and have nots), because it is literally a radical perspective that's not accepted by most people.

2. JC's comment on "evil communist country" has more defining charateristics of a government than its people. If I said North Korea is an "evil communist country", would anyone interpret that as an attack against the North Korean people? If someone said South Korea is an evil dictatoral country, would I see it as a racist disparage on the South Korean people? No. I would find such comments attributable to the South Korean government, not the people. When I make my defence on such comments, I will be defending the former regime that held power in South Korea, not the people who were oppressed by it.

I do understand Pangu's point that we have to clearly express ourselves to avoid misinterpretations, but what I would like to say is that this is no court of law or an academic discussion where concepts have to be made clear to make one's point. The context of her speech was casual in nature, and we should just take her meaning casually, interpreting it in the most casual sense. It's true that JC was very ignorant of China's current political status, but she did admit that her perspective on China has changed. It is my personal opinion that Pangu was distorting JC's true intetions when he made JC's comments into a racist attack against the Chinese people, when it is best interpreted as an attack on the poliitcal organization of China.